Should suspects on U.S. terrorism list be able to buy guns?

shuamort · 03-09-05, 11:17 AM

Suspects on U.S. terrorism list bought guns

Quote:

WASHINGTON, March 8 (Reuters) - Dozens of terror suspects on U.S. watch lists got government approval to buy guns legally in the United States last year, according to a congressional investigation released on Tuesday.

The Government Accountability Office report said people associated with terrorist groups had taken advantage of loopholes in U.S. gun laws that do not automatically bar a person belonging to such a group from buying a gun.

FBI Director Robert Mueller said changes to the law might be needed in order to limit weapons access to people on a watchlist but who do not have disqualifying factors that would stop them from being allowed to have a gun.

He said the FBI kept track of people on the list but still granted approval to buy a weapon. "When we are alerted to the fact that a person on the watchlist is going to be allowed to have the weapon, then we don't let it go. We follow up on it," Mueller said during testimony to a Congressional committee.

People in the United States who buy guns from dealers have to have a background check before being allowed to purchase the weapon. Their names are checked to see whether they have disqualifying factors such as felony convictions or mental illness, or are illegal immigrants.

Of these people on terror lists trying to buy guns, the report said 35 sales were allowed to go ahead because the background checks found no disqualifying information.

Authorities got an additional 14 gun applications from terrorism suspects in the four months after the study ended and all but two were cleared to proceed, the report said.

Gun control advocates argue that current gun laws favor gun owners' privacy rights lobbied by the powerful National Rifle Association, or NRA, and give suspected terrorists an opportunity to evade scrutiny while obtaining weapons.

NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre disagreed with both groups and said he believed current procedures were sufficient. "I don't think any more legislation is needed," said LaPierre.

So what say you? Do you think that this is a loophole that needs to be closed, that we shouldn't let people on the FBI's terrorism list to have access to guns, or should we go with the NRA and let the terrorists who haven't committed any crimes to buy all the guns they can?

shuamort · 03-09-05, 11:25 AM

Let me quickly say that the people on the suspected terrorist list have NOT been prosecuted for any terrorist crimes and there is no proof against them for committing terrorist activities (otherwise, they'd have been arrested already).

sebastiansdreams · 04-23-05, 01:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shuamort

Let me quickly say that the people on the suspected terrorist list have NOT been prosecuted for any terrorist crimes and there is no proof against them for committing terrorist activities (otherwise, they'd have been arrested already).

Do we know how they got on this list? I mean if this is a list of men and women who openly belong to groups that preach terrorism and attack, then perhaps it wouldn't be so bad to at very least have a much stricter policy on their purchase of guns. While you do have the Constitutional right to purchase and own a gun, if people's lives are possibly in danger, perhaps this is something that should be considered in the courtroom, no?

shuamort · 04-23-05, 09:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sebastiansdreams

Do we know how they got on this list? I mean if this is a list of men and women who openly belong to groups that preach terrorism and attack, then perhaps it wouldn't be so bad to at very least have a much stricter policy on their purchase of guns. While you do have the Constitutional right to purchase and own a gun, if people's lives are possibly in danger, perhaps this is something that should be considered in the courtroom, no?

U.S. terror watch list keeps eye on all groups

Quote:

Regardless, the incident raises questions in the ongoing debate about the terror watch lists and who is on them, a subject that some say is being kept so secret by federal law-enforcement and intelligence officials that mistakes are inevitable.
"The lists are both so shrouded in secrecy and so large that inevitably innocent people are swept up as potential suspects or terrorists especially when you have lists that are maintained by intelligence agencies that have very little oversight," he said.
The Bush administration has attempted to stem confusion caused by the existence of multiple watch lists by establishing a joint FBI-CIA Terrorist Threat Integration Center (TTIC), which consolidates more than a dozen previous lists, including the State Department's TIPOFF database of more than 110,000 known and suspected terrorists.

In other words, it's a list of people that have some reason or another been added to the list as well as a group of people with similar names being detained, accused, or otherwise inconvenienced by this list.

sebastiansdreams · 04-23-05, 12:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shuamort

U.S. terror watch list keeps eye on all groups

In other words, it's a list of people that have some reason or another been added to the list as well as a group of people with similar names being detained, accused, or otherwise inconvenienced by this list.

Then if they're gonna start taking away rights, they better get a better list.

ShamMol · 04-23-05, 01:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sebastiansdreams

Then if they're gonna start taking away rights, they better get a better list.

Ok, I voted for both maybe and a straight no. Why you may ask. I think that some people on those lists are really bad guys who probably wouldn't hesitate to either receive training from bin laden's group or have received training. But, the flip side is that there are some people on those lists that have no reason to be there. There was a no-fly list with a senator's name on it for example. These kinks have to be worked out in my opinion before we can categorically deny those people their right to bear arms.

LaMidRighter · 05-20-05, 01:34 PM

If these guys can clear their name, sure, but as long as there is any suspicion as to their motives, no.

Simon W. Moon · 05-20-05, 05:53 PM

Before the gubmint goes about depriving people of the Constitutional rights, I think there should be significant due process. Writing someone's name on a list is insufficient.

To me the question comes down to how precious are our American freedoms? AFAICT, they're more precious than life- that's why we sacrifice life for liberty. So even if some odd percentage of these people actually do something untoward with their weapons, I don't think that it justifies invalidating our Second Amendment rights based merely on some suspicions.

Simon W. Moon · 05-20-05, 05:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LaMidRighter

If these guys can clear their name, sure, but as long as there is any suspicion as to their motives, no.

Why should they have to clear their names? The Gubmint should have to prove some sort of wrong doing. The burden of proof lies with the accuser in this instance.

LaMidRighter · 05-21-05, 01:32 PM

Why should they have to clear their names? Real simple, you have a very tiny faction of muslims who will kill anyone they disagree with and are conniving little sob's. You are talking about people who will bring anything, including box cutters on a plane to kill another human being. If I have to pass a seven day waiting period and F.B.I. check with no probable cause except that I want a gun, then why should someone suspected of bad intent be given an absolute pass. It boils down to probable cause.